Justice News

Five Monroe County Residents And Two California Men Indicted For Methamphetamine Trafficking

The United States Attorneys Office for the Middle District of Pennsylvania announced that five Monroe County residents and two California men have been indicted by a federal grand jury in Scranton for conspiring to distribute methamphetamine in the Monroe County area in 2013 and 2014.

According to United States Attorney Peter Smith, the indictment, returned by the grand jury in April of this year and made public today, charges a methamphetamine trafficking conspiracy whereby the defendants obtained high-quality methamphetamine from sources in California which they then distributed for profit in the Monroe County area over a two year period. Charged with conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine are the following individuals:

In addition to the conspiracy charge the indictment also charges Horton, Borushak, Tucker and Ianuale with distributing methamphetamine. Altemose is also charged with the offense of maintaining drug-involved premises, for allowing methamphetamine to be stored and distributed from her residence. Six of the defendants are now in custody. One of them, Altemose, is out on bail.

The investigation was conducted jointly by the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Pennsylvania State Police, the Pocono Mountain Regional Police Department and the Stroud Regional Police Department.

Prosecution is assigned to Assistant United States Attorney Robert J. O'Hara.

Indictments and Criminal Informations are only allegations. All person charged are presumed to be innocent unless and until found guilty in court.

A sentence following a finding of guilty is imposed by the Judge after consideration of the applicable sentencing statutes and the Federal Sentencing Guidelines.

In this case, the maximum penalty under the federal statute is imprisonment for twenty years, a term of supervised release following imprisonment, and a fine. Under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines, the Judge is also required to consider and weigh a number of factors, including the nature, circumstances and seriousness of the offense; the history and characteristics of the defendant; and the need to punish the defendant, protect the public, and provide for the defendant’s educational, vocational and medical needs. For these reasons, the statutory maximum penalty for the offense is not an accurate indicator of the potential sentence for a specific defendant.